The well known nationally syndicated columnist David Broder reported the recent findings of two academic political scientists. These scholars found that voters are quite turned off by negative campaigns of politicians. Many people went as far as not voting because of this Nevertheless, the political scientists noted it is futile to urge candiates to stay positive. The damage from staying positive is heaviest when the opponent is attacking. Explain the dilemma in terms of strategic behavior.

The dilemma of strategic behavior in negative campaigning can be understood by analyzing the incentives and consequences for politicians when deciding whether to stay positive or resort to negative tactics during a campaign.

When politicians engage in negative campaigning, they often attempt to discredit their opponents by emphasizing their flaws or attacking their character. This can be effective because negative information tends to have a greater impact on voters' perceptions than positive information. Research shows that voters are indeed turned off by negative campaigns, and some individuals may even choose not to vote because of this negativity.

On the other hand, political scientists have noted that it is futile to urge candidates to stay positive in the face of attacks from their opponents. This is because staying positive while being attacked can lead to significant damage to a candidate's reputation. If an opponent is running a negative campaign, voters might perceive the positive candidate as weak or ineffective if they do not address the attacks appropriately.

Therefore, the dilemma arises from the need to balance the negative consequences of engaging in negative campaigning (such as turning off voters) with the potential damage caused by staying positive when facing attacks. Politicians are strategically motivated to protect and enhance their own interests, which include winning elections and maintaining a positive public image. As a result, they must carefully consider how to navigate this dilemma.

To address this strategic dilemma, politicians often employ a mixed strategy, combining positive messaging with occasional negative tactics. They may try to highlight their own strengths and achievements while selectively responding to attacks from opponents. This approach allows them to maintain a positive image while effectively countering and neutralizing negative narratives.

In summary, the strategic dilemma in negative campaigning arises from the tension between voters' aversion to negativity and the potential damage caused by staying positive in the face of opponent attacks. Politicians must carefully navigate this dilemma by employing a mixed strategy that balances positive messaging with strategic responses to negative attacks.